Opinion
No. 636, 2001
Decided: January 18, 2002
Superior (Sussex) Cr. ID No. 92S05475DI.
APPEALS DISMISSED.
Unpublished Opinion is below.
JACK D. GIBBS, Defendant Below, Court Below: Superior Court Appellant, of the State of Delaware in and for Sussex County v. STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff Below, Appellee. No. 636, 2001 Supreme Court of the State of Delaware. Decided: January 18, 2002
Superior (Sussex) Cr. ID No. 92S05475DI.
Before VEASEY, Chief Justice, BERGER and STEELE, Justices.
Myron T. Steele
ORDER
This 18th day of January 2002, upon consideration of the notice of appeal filed by Jack D. Gibbs; the notice to show cause issued by the Clerk;
and the response by Mr. Gibbs to the notice to show cause, it appears to the Court that:
(1) On December 17, 2001, the Court received Mr. Gibbs' notice of appeal from a Superior Court sentence dated October 12, 2001. A timely notice of appeal from a sentence dated October 12, 2001, should have been filed on or before November 12, 2001.
(2) On December 19, 2001, the Clerk issued a notice, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b), directing Mr. Gibbs to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for failure to file a timely notice of appeal. Mr. Gibbs filed a response to the notice to show cause on December 28, 2001. In his response, Mr. Gibbs contends that he was "unaware of filing within 30 days of [his] sentencing order." He also states that he did not have counsel to represent him at the probation hearing, and therefore there was no one to explain to him the procedures for filing an appeal.
(3) Time is a jurisdictional requirement. A notice of appeal must be received by the Office of the Clerk of this Court within the applicable time period in order to be effective. An appellant's pro se status does not excuse a failure to comply strictly with the jurisdictional requirements. Unless an appellant can demonstrate that the failure to file a timely notice of appeal is attributable to court-related personnel, his appeal cannot be considered.
Carr v. State, Del. Supr., 554 A.2d 778, 779, cert. denied, 493 U.S. 829 (1989).
Supr. Ct. R. 10(a).
Supr. Ct. R. 6; Carr v. State, 554 A.2d at 779.
Bey v. State, Del. Supr., 402 A.2d 362, 363 (1979).
(5) There is nothing in the record that reflects that Mr. Gibbs' failure to file a timely notice of appeal in this case is attributable to court-related personnel. Consequently, this case does not fall within the exception to the general rule that mandates the timely filing of a notice of appeal. Thus, the Court concludes that the within appeal must be dismissed.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29(b), that the within appeal is DISMISSED.